This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mazor, K. M. Articles by Hambleton, R. K. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Effect of Sample Size on the Functioning of the Mantel-Haenszel Statistic

University of Massachusetts at Amherst

Brian E. Clauser

University of Massachusetts at Amherst

Ronald K. Hambleton

University of Massachusetts at Amherst

The Mantel-Haenszel (MH) procedure has become one of the most popular procedures for detecting differential item functioning. Valid results with relatively small numbers of examinees are one of the advantages typically attributed to this procedure. In this study, examinee item responses were simulated to contain differentially functioning items, and then were analyzed at five sample sizes to compare detection rates. Results showed the MH procedure missed 25 to 30% of the differentially functioning items when groups of 2000 were used. When 500 or fewer examinees were retained in each group, more than 50% of the differentially functioning items were missed. The items most likely to be undetected were those which were most difficult, those with a small difference in item difficulty between the two groups, and poorly discriminating items.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 52, No. 2, 443-451 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164492052002020


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. M. Fidalgo and J. M. Madeira Generalized Mantel-Haenszel Methods for Differential Item Functioning Detection Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 2008; 68(6): 940 - 958. [Abstract] [PDF]

				X. Wang, E. T. Bradlow, H. Wainer, and E. S. Muller A Bayesian Method for Studying DIF: A Cautionary Tale Filled With Surprises and Delights Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, September 1, 2008; 33(3): 363 - 384. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. D. Hidalgo and J. A. LOPez-Pina Differential Item Functioning Detection and Effect Size: A Comparison between Logistic Regression and Mantel-Haenszel Procedures Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 2004; 64(6): 903 - 915. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. M. Fidalgo, D. Ferreres, and J. MuNiz Utility of the Mantel-Haenszel Procedure for Detecting Differential Item Functioning in Small Samples Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 2004; 64(6): 925 - 936. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. A. Hanson Uniform DIF and DIF Defined by Differences in Item Response Functions Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 1998; 23(3): 244 - 253. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. D. Huang, A. T. Church, and M. S. Katigbak Identifying Cultural Differences in Items and Traits: Differential Item Functioning in the NEO Personality Inventory Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, March 1, 1997; 28(2): 192 - 218. [Abstract]

				P. Narayanon and H. Swaminathan Identification of Items that Show Nonuniform DIF Applied Psychological Measurement, September 1, 1996; 20(3): 257 - 274. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Narayanan and H. Swaminathan Performance of the Mantel-Haenszel and Simultaneous Item Bias Procedures for Detecting Differential Item Functioning Applied Psychological Measurement, December 1, 1994; 18(4): 315 - 328. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. M. Mazor, B. E. Clauser, and R. K. Hambleton Identification of Nonuniform Differential Item Functioning Using a Variation of the Mantel-Haenszel Procedure Educational and Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1994; 54(2): 284 - 291. [Abstract]